Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add Star skeleton #98

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 3, 2017
Merged

Add Star skeleton #98

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 3, 2017

Conversation

evilsoft
Copy link
Owner

@evilsoft evilsoft commented Mar 2, 2017

A Super Star is what you are

This PR adds another skeleton to the docs for this issue#42. This one for the Star. Also in anticipation of the removal of the monoidial implementation on Arrow (broken in sooo many ways), this PR also removes the concat, empty and value bits off of Arrow

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 2, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 8bfdfab on star-docs into 0d23be8 on docs.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 2, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 9b24cd5 on star-docs into 0d23be8 on docs.

@evilsoft
Copy link
Owner Author

evilsoft commented Mar 2, 2017

May want to consolidate the types a bit, make it easier to follow.
I mean come on, they are all Monad, we get that!!

@evilsoft evilsoft mentioned this pull request Mar 2, 2017
@@ -0,0 +1,61 @@
# Star

`Monad m => Star a (m b)`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let's keep 🌽 and only try to say Star a b, but here are some ideas I came up with:

  • Star a (Monad b)

  • Star a b
    . Monad m => b ~> m b

  • Star a (m b)
    . Monad m

The superstar inside me says "keep the laws implicit until skeleton is drawn!"

Copy link
Owner Author

@evilsoft evilsoft Mar 2, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I got the docs. thanks.
Like I said in gitter and on pr#99. I am going to go with what I did there.

Copy link
Contributor

@rstegg rstegg Mar 2, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Anytime! I thought the new line could better say "under the implication of" or "constraint on". the . was just a poopie way of indenting. Great jorb never less!!

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Mar 2, 2017

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 878fdb3 on star-docs into 0d23be8 on docs.

@evilsoft
Copy link
Owner Author

evilsoft commented Mar 3, 2017

@evilsoft evilsoft merged commit b980c0c into docs Mar 3, 2017
@evilsoft evilsoft deleted the star-docs branch March 3, 2017 23:54
evilsoft added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 13, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants